|
|
| (40 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| | <div align="center"> |
| | <div style='font-family:courier;font-size:20x;color:black;'> |
|
| |
|
| ==SECOND DRAFT==
| | '''THESIS OUTLINE'''<br><br> |
| ===I. Introduction===
| | '''[[User:Zpalomagar/THESIS OUTLINE/FIFTH DRAFT|FINAL VERSION (14/11/19)]]'''<br> |
| Background:
| | <br> |
| Cartography was an instrument of power and domination, they used to define the territory and draw its borders and resources. In the vein of Denis Wood, John Pickles, and J. B. Harley, this paper places itself within the strand of critical cartography that emerged in the 1980s with the aim to redefine the concept of mapping by analysing maps as creative and ideological constructions making reality as much as representing it, shaping the political identities of the people inhabiting it.
| | '''PREVIOUS VERSIONS'''<br><br> |
| | | <s>[[User:Zpalomagar/THESIS OUTLINE/SIXTH|WORK IN PROGRESS]]<br></s> |
| Statement: Diagrams, cartographies and maps can be transformed into socio-political communication tools which empower communities and give visibility to their common interests, revealing hidden information and making the reader raise awareness about social crisis. This mechanism challenge the traditional storytelling becoming a technological design instrument that spread knowledge through visual global language.
| | <s>[[User:Zpalomagar/THESIS OUTLINE/FOURTH DRAFT|FOURTH DRAFT]]<br></s> |
| | | <s>[[User:Zpalomagar/THESIS OUTLINE/THIRD DRAFT|THIRD DRAFT]]<br></s> |
| ===II. Body of thesis===
| | <s>[[User:Zpalomagar/THESIS OUTLINE/SECOND DRAFT|SECOND DRAFT]]<br></s> |
| | | <s>[[User:Zpalomagar/THESIS OUTLINE/FIRST DRAFT|FIRST DRAFT]]<br></s> |
| #Topic 1: Visual language for creating radical maps
| |
| *Coding/ decoding information
| |
| **The grammar of visual language (Semiology of graphics)
| |
| *Interpretation / readability / levels of complexity
| |
| **Jan Tschichold - “as a rule, we no longer read quietly line by line, but glance quickly over the whole, and only if our interests is awakened do the study in detail”
| |
| * Software conditions you when making visual representations: Mapping (interpretation) vs tracing (reproduction)
| |
| **Wester supremacy in technological visual translations (Gaps of representation) - Ramon Amaro
| |
| **Diagrammatic layout in software representation invite you to represent hierarchical structures (Tree, Pack circles)
| |
| | |
| #Topic 2: Community mapping | Collaborative practices in mapping counter-cartographies Tools for production wee need people (creation of a cartography people’s role)
| |
| - Crowdsourcing processes
| |
| - Wisdom of Crowds
| |
| - why to contribute? —> idealism or local needs
| |
| - Where are the information/ data is everything - communities voices
| |
| - Protocols and dilemmas of collaborative work —> systematisation of data
| |
| - Through collective mapping, the language, tools and techniques of cartography formerly restricted to “specialist” are socialised and reinvented —> expanded to non conventional uses
| |
| | |
| # Topic 3: Sharing diagrams with people (Re-publishing) , giving their knowledge back!
| |
| * * *Visual language is a powerful instrument to Popularise information and make societies gain awareness
| |
| * * *Otto Neurath The museum of society and economy - Working class in the museum
| |
| * * *Create common identity
| |
| * * *Mural anti-eviction map
| |
| * * *Performing diagrams
| |
| * * *Lize Mogel: Performing infrastructure
| |
| * * *The cartographic mediums display
| |
| * * *Transforming knowledge into action
| |
| * * *Collective maps as urban tools (Iconoclasistas)
| |
| | |
| ===III. Conclusion ===
| |
| * Summarize the main points
| |
| *Make a strong/ memorable final statement: For centuries cartographies had been defined by state and domination and now the reflect individuals’ voices. Thanks to technology and collaborative tools this process is possible easier and faster nowadays.
| |
